Comments on: Why City Opera May Bite the Dust, and What That Means for New Yorkhttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/
People and TrendsSun, 10 Sep 2017 20:18:46 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: NYCOdeathknellhttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/#comment-2199
Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:50:00 +0000http://www.observer.com/?p=161274#comment-2199Stating that New York would become a one opera company town like Minneapolis is highly disingenuous. There is a plethora of smaller companies like Di Capo, Brooklyn Repertory Opera, Gotham Chamber Opera etc. which are well supported, healthy and that’s where the folks who want to hear moderately prices live opera. (Those who are not heading to a movie theatre) George Steel is wet behind the ears and is far from a qualified fundraiser. (That work was done for him at Columbia.) He has no idea how to lead a major arts organization. Columbia made up every shortfall at the Miller Theatre during his tenure. Adios NYCO, bad choices by the board has sealed your fate.
]]>By: Lesaltoidshttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/#comment-2198
Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:05:00 +0000http://www.observer.com/?p=161274#comment-2198Good… I hope the shut down immediately. No diversity within the organization.
]]>By: Henry Hollandhttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/#comment-2197
Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:02:00 +0000http://www.observer.com/?p=161274#comment-2197“The singers there now may very well be up and coming but the powers that
be at that opera house in particular don’t seem to think that has any
real bearing on whether an opera fan is going to see their opera. When
in fact it is the ONLY reason”

Speak for yourself, not me. I don’t care about singers, I care about the operas themselves and composers. I don’t care if the best singer in the history of singing was advertised, if they’re singing Donizetti or Handel, I’m not getting within 10 miles of the opera house. You canary fanciers are a small but vocal (ha!) part of the opera audience, most people go because “Oh, look dear, they’re doing “La Boheme” tonight, let’s go!” not because “Oh, look dear, there’s a really good singer doing Marcello tonight, let’s go”.

As for NYCO, what a sad turn of events, they’ve done some great work in the past (the production of “Die Tote Stadt” is incredible, for example) and the rep was miles better than the mausoleum across the plaza, but as Phoenix’ excellent post below notes, the financial situation has changed drastically since even the 1990’s. I can see them becoming like a smaller German house, doing 5-6 productions a year, but nothing on the scale they’re used to.

]]>By: phoenixhttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/#comment-2196
Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:57:00 +0000http://www.observer.com/?p=161274#comment-2196 Promoting singers is probably a good idea, to a certain extent, but then with singer’s contracts and the ensuing legal hassles, by promoting singers City Opera could wind up like that status-symbolized bastion of the American Operatic Dream, the Metropolitan Opera: media hyping performers who are long past their prime singing years. It is just plain fraudulent to advertise a 2nd-rate has-been singer as sensational simply because that singer is still under legal contract to sing the role for the company. However, with a singer who has traditionally proven great artistry worldwide, such a maneuver could be valid advertising. I very much enjoyed the opportunity to see Victoria de los Angeles as Carmen in Newark, although I understand her City Opera Carmen was not such a success. However, the Met’s style of ‘promoting’ 2nd-rate veteran singers debuting in a role long past their prime and giving mediocre performances does nothing to support the aesthetic artistic values of opera itself as art form, as demonstrated by their embarassing ‘promotion’ and HD telecast this last season of Wagner’s Die Walküre.
As Zachary says in this article, expenses have increased greatly. It is no wonder the City Opera is going under. The middle class has traditionally supported second opera houses in large cities like the English National Opera in London and the Komische Oper in Berlin. However, every year the gap between the rich and everyone else in the U.S. gets wider and wider, the middle class is diminishing just like the City Opera, more & more would-be patrons are getting priced out the market.
The demographics of NYC have changed drastically since the glory days of City Opera. When I was young and going to City Opera, I remember performances where almost the entire section I was sitting in was occupied by young émigrés from eastern Europe. Now, the statistics reveal traditionally non-european culturally-influenced groups moving into NYC. Can they acquire an interest in opera? Of course they can. We all ‘acquired’ it, why not the new émigrés of the 21st century? The answer is again financial, who can not only afford to go, but find the time to go when they are working 3 jobs? When I was in college, NYC was the place to go if you were from another part of the U.S. simply because 1) you were able to immerse yourself in the arts (such as opera); 2) jobs were plentiful; and 3) you could live fairly cheaply in rent-controlled apartments.
But now the situation has changed. Because of the expense of living in NYC, it is no longer the draw it once was for Americans in the lower financial bracket from other parts of the country.
]]>By: Operaloverhttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/#comment-2195
Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:46:00 +0000http://www.observer.com/?p=161274#comment-2195Why does no one come to city opera? It’s an easy answer. They don’t promote the singers. At ALL. I don’t go to the opera to see a director’s vision or a pretty set. I go because I have heard about a great new singe that I have to see liver-you will notice that the website and all marketing of city opera is almost devoid of this information. City opera was the place you could hear Carreras sing his first US Tosca, Domingo, Sills, etc-you know the story. You think the articles about the 1966 Giulio Cesare were about the set????? The singers there now may very well be up and coming but the powers that be at that opera house in particular don’t seem to think that has any real bearing on whether an opera fan is going to see their opera. When in fact it is the ONLY reason. Market and promote your singers and you will have a very different story. The operas are artifacts-antique, out-of date really to the the contemporary ear. It is the singer who makes it connect to the audience. Not the history.
]]>By: The OperaNow! Staffhttp://observer.com/2011/06/why-city-opera-may-bite-the-dust-and-what-that-means-for-new-york/#comment-2194
Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:37:00 +0000http://www.observer.com/?p=161274#comment-2194Nobody came because they were used to not coming. It’s very easy for people to get along without you, and that is what NYC did as a result of the dark season.
]]>